Management And Pilots Should Read This!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Raas767 - what you're saying about seniority is bollox and you know it. I can't think of one other industry that employs it in the same way that the airlines do - it's something that benefits the unions, not anyone else.
Are you trying to tell me that any sizeable operation cannot survive without formal seniority? OK, so how does it work at IBM? Ford? General Motors? BP? Microsoft? All of those companies employ rather more than 125,000 people globally and they seem to do rather well without it. Sure, they have unions. So?
By doing away with seniority, you can recruit staff for the specific positions you need. Short of 747 captains? No problem - go out and get them. Need RJ FOs? Same thing. Closing down a particular fleet? Then the people on that fleet's contracts terminate. Want to promote from within? That's fine - but based on ability rather than time served or 'dead mans shoes'.
Strangely enough, this is generally the away that things work in industries other than ours. Nothing wrong with it. It's the 21st century - the days of jobs for life have long gone.
Mowgli - what you're saying is spot on; I've been saying it for years. Telecommuting is very much the way to go - there's no need for grossly expensive infrastructure like Waterworld and the Compass Centre, for example. Rather do what JetBlue does and issue your crews with notebooks, mobiles and PDAs and trust them to be adult enough to check before setting off to see that the aircraft you're scheduled to fly isn't going to be a couple of hours late - which puts you out of duty time at the end of the day - and to check the weather, flight plans etc without having to physically go to Ops. Indeed, there isn't even a need for a physical Ops centre!
Another benefit is that you then don't need to spend vast amounts on living in expensive areas but rather can commute in from a rural setting where you can bring up your family in peace, quiet and safety.
Are you trying to tell me that any sizeable operation cannot survive without formal seniority? OK, so how does it work at IBM? Ford? General Motors? BP? Microsoft? All of those companies employ rather more than 125,000 people globally and they seem to do rather well without it. Sure, they have unions. So?
By doing away with seniority, you can recruit staff for the specific positions you need. Short of 747 captains? No problem - go out and get them. Need RJ FOs? Same thing. Closing down a particular fleet? Then the people on that fleet's contracts terminate. Want to promote from within? That's fine - but based on ability rather than time served or 'dead mans shoes'.
Strangely enough, this is generally the away that things work in industries other than ours. Nothing wrong with it. It's the 21st century - the days of jobs for life have long gone.
Mowgli - what you're saying is spot on; I've been saying it for years. Telecommuting is very much the way to go - there's no need for grossly expensive infrastructure like Waterworld and the Compass Centre, for example. Rather do what JetBlue does and issue your crews with notebooks, mobiles and PDAs and trust them to be adult enough to check before setting off to see that the aircraft you're scheduled to fly isn't going to be a couple of hours late - which puts you out of duty time at the end of the day - and to check the weather, flight plans etc without having to physically go to Ops. Indeed, there isn't even a need for a physical Ops centre!
Another benefit is that you then don't need to spend vast amounts on living in expensive areas but rather can commute in from a rural setting where you can bring up your family in peace, quiet and safety.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Guvnor
Oh dear, Guv, you’re slipping back into your old ways. You confuse what is your own, never humble, opinion with reality. And you are stooping to rudeness (to Raas767, at least) at the same time.
Let us get a few things straight, shall we? IBM, Ford, General Motors, BP, and MS do not operate commercial airlines. While some may own corporate fleets, they look to professionals to handle their aviation needs. And the vast majority of professionals have found that the seniority system, despite some of its more obvious drawbacks (particularly for the frustrated entrepreneurial types like your good self), is a tried and trusted system which has benefits far outweighing its acknowledged limitations.
You say
Interesting. So, your model airline:
You clearly have no sense of equity, no sense of responsibility towards loyal employees and their dependants, and absolutely no awareness of the potential damage that might flow from such irresponsible attitudes as your own. God save us all from the wannabe employers of your ilk.
Sadly, you are right in one awful respect when you say: “It's the 21st century - the days of jobs for life have long gone.” Would you care to tell us why you so obviously believe that a hard working, dedicated and loyal employee does not deserve long-term stability in his/her employment? On second thoughts, don’t bother, for I’m sure we will be treated to more of the same old drivel from you. Oh, and how have these principles gone down in the past in the many airlines you have run and which no longer exist? Work well did they?
Yes, I can see it all now. Your employees will be at home enjoying their rural peace and tranquility while being endlessly bombarded by the mindless drivel being transmitted through the ether from their verbose and lunatic employer. Oh yeah. Sure.
[ 22 November 2001: Message edited by: tilii ]
Oh dear, Guv, you’re slipping back into your old ways. You confuse what is your own, never humble, opinion with reality. And you are stooping to rudeness (to Raas767, at least) at the same time.
Let us get a few things straight, shall we? IBM, Ford, General Motors, BP, and MS do not operate commercial airlines. While some may own corporate fleets, they look to professionals to handle their aviation needs. And the vast majority of professionals have found that the seniority system, despite some of its more obvious drawbacks (particularly for the frustrated entrepreneurial types like your good self), is a tried and trusted system which has benefits far outweighing its acknowledged limitations.
You say
Short of 747 captains? No problem - go out and get them. Need RJ FOs? Same thing. Closing down a particular fleet? Then the people on that fleet's contracts terminate. Want to promote from within? That's fine - but based on ability rather than time served or 'dead mans shoes'.
You clearly have no sense of equity, no sense of responsibility towards loyal employees and their dependants, and absolutely no awareness of the potential damage that might flow from such irresponsible attitudes as your own. God save us all from the wannabe employers of your ilk.
Sadly, you are right in one awful respect when you say: “It's the 21st century - the days of jobs for life have long gone.” Would you care to tell us why you so obviously believe that a hard working, dedicated and loyal employee does not deserve long-term stability in his/her employment? On second thoughts, don’t bother, for I’m sure we will be treated to more of the same old drivel from you. Oh, and how have these principles gone down in the past in the many airlines you have run and which no longer exist? Work well did they?
Yes, I can see it all now. Your employees will be at home enjoying their rural peace and tranquility while being endlessly bombarded by the mindless drivel being transmitted through the ether from their verbose and lunatic employer. Oh yeah. Sure.
[ 22 November 2001: Message edited by: tilii ]
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: PlanetX
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting thread.....Then the Guv gets involved as ever, and we're back to the playground. Guv, please stop referring to this industry as "ours". Those of us professionally involved in Aviation find the fact that you associated your "Walter Mitty" world with us, insulting.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Belgium
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes indead, OUR industry hey, Guvnor...
I thought you were unemployed for the last few years now? (judgeing from your continuous flow of posts).
Anyway, it sure seems as if you have found a job for the rest of your useless life through this forum...
I thought you were unemployed for the last few years now? (judgeing from your continuous flow of posts).
Anyway, it sure seems as if you have found a job for the rest of your useless life through this forum...
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a middle way,tilii, in that pilots could be contracted as say a 747 pilot rather than a pilot.
If the company feels that the 747 fleet is no longer commercially viable then those contracts are sadly ended, rather than having the airline, and other jobs, crippled by some archaic rule than involves playing musical chairs.
If, however, the company replaces the 747 with 777, then they should be duty bound to give first priority to the redundant drivers.
Corporate loyalty (how does that show itself, by the way?) is fine and should be rewarded whenever possible, but not at an unacceptable cost to the airline and other employees.
This is how companies like the ones referred to above run their factories, plants, power stations etc.
Fair play should govern all industries equally - without some sort of special fair play restricting airline growth and survival.
[ 22 November 2001: Message edited by: Pete Otube ]
If the company feels that the 747 fleet is no longer commercially viable then those contracts are sadly ended, rather than having the airline, and other jobs, crippled by some archaic rule than involves playing musical chairs.
If, however, the company replaces the 747 with 777, then they should be duty bound to give first priority to the redundant drivers.
Corporate loyalty (how does that show itself, by the way?) is fine and should be rewarded whenever possible, but not at an unacceptable cost to the airline and other employees.
This is how companies like the ones referred to above run their factories, plants, power stations etc.
Fair play should govern all industries equally - without some sort of special fair play restricting airline growth and survival.
[ 22 November 2001: Message edited by: Pete Otube ]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Pete
OK, fine, so we should all rush to the training establishments and qualify ourselves as a 'B747 pilot' or 'A380 pilot' (because jobs on these will surely attract the highest salary levels and thus the greatest return on our training investment).
Naturally, when the airlines need to recruit the common or garden 'B737-200 pilot' none of us will be there for recruitment. We will all be waiting for the next recruitment drive for B747 pilots.
Wake up and smell the coffee, dear chap.
OK, fine, so we should all rush to the training establishments and qualify ourselves as a 'B747 pilot' or 'A380 pilot' (because jobs on these will surely attract the highest salary levels and thus the greatest return on our training investment).
Naturally, when the airlines need to recruit the common or garden 'B737-200 pilot' none of us will be there for recruitment. We will all be waiting for the next recruitment drive for B747 pilots.
Wake up and smell the coffee, dear chap.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For smaller carriers hiring experienced pilots on type is certainly the way to go. Why train new pilots when the marketplace offers a wide selection of type-experienced guys/gals?
A recent issue of Flight has a perfect example...Air Atlanta Icelandic needs B747 crews. Do they train their ex-L1011 crews? Certainly not, much more cost effective to recruit experience from outside. If MORE aircarriers did this, it would help provide a more reasonable return for shareholders, those long forgotten folks....who funded the carrier in the first place. Airlines do not owe any particular loyality to pilots...or any other employee for that matter.
And for those who say that..."what about pilot loyality, and the pilot shortage?"...as recent events have shown, there is no pilot shortage, and certainly not likely to be anytime soon.
A recent issue of Flight has a perfect example...Air Atlanta Icelandic needs B747 crews. Do they train their ex-L1011 crews? Certainly not, much more cost effective to recruit experience from outside. If MORE aircarriers did this, it would help provide a more reasonable return for shareholders, those long forgotten folks....who funded the carrier in the first place. Airlines do not owe any particular loyality to pilots...or any other employee for that matter.
And for those who say that..."what about pilot loyality, and the pilot shortage?"...as recent events have shown, there is no pilot shortage, and certainly not likely to be anytime soon.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tilii
Now you're using silly logic and tired old "smell the coffee" lines.
Look sonny, I'm drinking the coffee, and lots of us don't want to fly 747's or boring long haul. Rather have a little less money and better lifestyle. There'll always be pilots wanting to fly all types of craft. There's minicab, bus and limousine drivers out there, as well as fishing, ferry and liner skippers. You must get out more!
Care for a cup?
Now you're using silly logic and tired old "smell the coffee" lines.
Look sonny, I'm drinking the coffee, and lots of us don't want to fly 747's or boring long haul. Rather have a little less money and better lifestyle. There'll always be pilots wanting to fly all types of craft. There's minicab, bus and limousine drivers out there, as well as fishing, ferry and liner skippers. You must get out more!
Care for a cup?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Belgium
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think our friend has made a very good remark there, i.e. where are you going to find all those self-qualified pilots for small and medium sized airplanes?
Mind you a type rating for a B737 or a B747 is about the same price, so if I had to decide which one to pay myself, I'd go for the last one as it will guarantee me better pay and better duty rules. I think nobody would bother training to fly planes like the canadair, Avro Rj or even the B737 and A320.
Of course the first 10 or 20 years you wouldn't have too much problems finding qualified people for these planes, as they would still be around, but remember both airplanes and people get older and have to be retired one day.
If for instance the mechanism you propose was introduced worlwide in the 1980s, then there would hardly be any A320 flying right now, simply because you wouldn't manage to find sufficient qualified pilots for this very efficient new plane!
You'd be stuck with old and costly B727 or and B737classic at the very best and even that would turn into a problem as more and more pilots retire over time....
Something to think about.
Mind you a type rating for a B737 or a B747 is about the same price, so if I had to decide which one to pay myself, I'd go for the last one as it will guarantee me better pay and better duty rules. I think nobody would bother training to fly planes like the canadair, Avro Rj or even the B737 and A320.
Of course the first 10 or 20 years you wouldn't have too much problems finding qualified people for these planes, as they would still be around, but remember both airplanes and people get older and have to be retired one day.
If for instance the mechanism you propose was introduced worlwide in the 1980s, then there would hardly be any A320 flying right now, simply because you wouldn't manage to find sufficient qualified pilots for this very efficient new plane!
You'd be stuck with old and costly B727 or and B737classic at the very best and even that would turn into a problem as more and more pilots retire over time....
Something to think about.
Grandpa Aerotart
As usual the Guvnor ignores the fact that seniority benefits the airlines as well!
What would be the extra training costs burden incurred in your system where pilots could ‘job jump’ and maintain their seat, be it LHS or RHS?
Or would you not bother with standardisation training?
And when the pilots took the experience your airline had provided and left to work somewhere where they were treated with some respect what would your attitude be then?
I suppose when a senior F/O got sick of seeing his chances of promotion killed by a never ending stream of Command qualified losers (why else are they coming to work for you?) and left you would just damn him to hell as a ‘typical bloody pilot’?
What a wonderful system which allows personalities to intervene in an individuals career! I have seen Check Captains and Fleet Captains score check rides on the basis of how they felt personally about an individual often enough to know that seniority is the lesser of evils.
I would suggest Guvnor that if this industry was ever burdened with a company run by yourself it would not be for long!
Chuck.
What would be the extra training costs burden incurred in your system where pilots could ‘job jump’ and maintain their seat, be it LHS or RHS?
Or would you not bother with standardisation training?
And when the pilots took the experience your airline had provided and left to work somewhere where they were treated with some respect what would your attitude be then?
I suppose when a senior F/O got sick of seeing his chances of promotion killed by a never ending stream of Command qualified losers (why else are they coming to work for you?) and left you would just damn him to hell as a ‘typical bloody pilot’?
What a wonderful system which allows personalities to intervene in an individuals career! I have seen Check Captains and Fleet Captains score check rides on the basis of how they felt personally about an individual often enough to know that seniority is the lesser of evils.
I would suggest Guvnor that if this industry was ever burdened with a company run by yourself it would not be for long!
Chuck.
Paxing All Over The World
I have read this post with interest and can only suggest (gently and quietly) that the Seniority system will end. When is matter of conjecture but end it will.
I have been working in telecommunications for 23 years and worked in a wide range of industries on both permanent and consultancy contracts: Retail; Banking; local government; air freight; broadcasting; funeral trade; container port; pharmaceuticals and others.
In those 23 years I have seen companies move from 'taditional' to 'hire and fire'. Not one of them is the same as it was ten years ago.
Regrettably, the word 'loyalty' rarely comes into it now. This works in reverse too, as staff show no loayalty to the company and pick and choose to suit themselves.
Do I like this? No. Would I want to move back to a more 'traditional' kind of employment? Yes. It will not happen.
It is true that dumping staff is stupid and it is always better to re-train an already experienced member of staff but if the money looks better in the short term - they will dump the staff! If, four years later, they have to hire back staff with the qualifications that they dumped, the excuse is, "The market changed". Short term is a max of two years. The money boys cannot see any further than that because that is what the city looks at. It is a closed loop.
The observations about laptops, PDAs and so forth is spot on. One client of mine is looking at exactly this and they are not a cutting edge company but local government!
It is true, also, that one of your major problems is that your working lives are 99% spent away from the office. Consequently, you are not 'visible' and can more easily be discounted. The comparison with truckers is well made and anything that can draw you together in that way would be valuable.
It is very sad that your business is changing to one that cares less but you are only just catching up with the rest of us, who have already experienced that change over the last ten years.
The change may happen fast it may happen slow but a large part of it wil be a generational change. The people starting their careers now, will not have the same loyalty built into their hearts as those now 45 and older. Their loyalty is to themselves alone. Again, I can only say that I have seen all of this before.
The only possibility is not to hold back the change but to jump ahead and force the change to where you want it to be. In this regard, your work is against you. Almost any other profession can arrange a meeting (or a series of) and get you under one roof within a short period of time for consulation. That is all but impossible for you folks - and the money boys know it.
Further, a pilot is by nature and training, one to make decisions and think for themself. That makes it very difficult to think collectively. Again, I have seen this in other industries.
The way for you to meet is by what you are doing now - electronically. Through the good offices of the wonderful and fabulous Chief Pilot PPRuNe (doffs cap).
I have been working in telecommunications for 23 years and worked in a wide range of industries on both permanent and consultancy contracts: Retail; Banking; local government; air freight; broadcasting; funeral trade; container port; pharmaceuticals and others.
In those 23 years I have seen companies move from 'taditional' to 'hire and fire'. Not one of them is the same as it was ten years ago.
Regrettably, the word 'loyalty' rarely comes into it now. This works in reverse too, as staff show no loayalty to the company and pick and choose to suit themselves.
Do I like this? No. Would I want to move back to a more 'traditional' kind of employment? Yes. It will not happen.
It is true that dumping staff is stupid and it is always better to re-train an already experienced member of staff but if the money looks better in the short term - they will dump the staff! If, four years later, they have to hire back staff with the qualifications that they dumped, the excuse is, "The market changed". Short term is a max of two years. The money boys cannot see any further than that because that is what the city looks at. It is a closed loop.
The observations about laptops, PDAs and so forth is spot on. One client of mine is looking at exactly this and they are not a cutting edge company but local government!
It is true, also, that one of your major problems is that your working lives are 99% spent away from the office. Consequently, you are not 'visible' and can more easily be discounted. The comparison with truckers is well made and anything that can draw you together in that way would be valuable.
It is very sad that your business is changing to one that cares less but you are only just catching up with the rest of us, who have already experienced that change over the last ten years.
The change may happen fast it may happen slow but a large part of it wil be a generational change. The people starting their careers now, will not have the same loyalty built into their hearts as those now 45 and older. Their loyalty is to themselves alone. Again, I can only say that I have seen all of this before.
The only possibility is not to hold back the change but to jump ahead and force the change to where you want it to be. In this regard, your work is against you. Almost any other profession can arrange a meeting (or a series of) and get you under one roof within a short period of time for consulation. That is all but impossible for you folks - and the money boys know it.
Further, a pilot is by nature and training, one to make decisions and think for themself. That makes it very difficult to think collectively. Again, I have seen this in other industries.
The way for you to meet is by what you are doing now - electronically. Through the good offices of the wonderful and fabulous Chief Pilot PPRuNe (doffs cap).
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Ft, Lauderdale,FL
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pax boy.
The seniority system will not end for a very simple reason. Pilots are generic. We are selected for a very specific skill which make us all virtually identical. We are all qualified to be captains one day. If we weren't then the airline would not have hired us. This being the case seniority is the best way to determine promotion within an airline. Everyone still has to pass whatever course you are involved in but there is no politics involved in the selection. Even the most junior of us like this system and even management likes it. There has never been a contract opener my management at my airline through out it's history where they wanted to do away with seniority.
The posting about simply hiring a captain of the street is nonsence as well because of standardization problems, pairing difficulties and the like. I can just visualize the disaster of putting an off the street captain next to a senior first officer who should have the job by virtue of his seniority. CRM would be nonexistant.
I sense that alot of people on this forum are from many different aspects of this business and bring points of view tainted by their experiences( me included), but trust me, seniority is here to stay at the big carriers. The alternative would be Kaos.
Now, since I don't have much seniority I have to fly to New York on Thanksgiving.
The seniority system will not end for a very simple reason. Pilots are generic. We are selected for a very specific skill which make us all virtually identical. We are all qualified to be captains one day. If we weren't then the airline would not have hired us. This being the case seniority is the best way to determine promotion within an airline. Everyone still has to pass whatever course you are involved in but there is no politics involved in the selection. Even the most junior of us like this system and even management likes it. There has never been a contract opener my management at my airline through out it's history where they wanted to do away with seniority.
The posting about simply hiring a captain of the street is nonsence as well because of standardization problems, pairing difficulties and the like. I can just visualize the disaster of putting an off the street captain next to a senior first officer who should have the job by virtue of his seniority. CRM would be nonexistant.
I sense that alot of people on this forum are from many different aspects of this business and bring points of view tainted by their experiences( me included), but trust me, seniority is here to stay at the big carriers. The alternative would be Kaos.
Now, since I don't have much seniority I have to fly to New York on Thanksgiving.
Guest
Posts: n/a
PAXboy
While I accept your argument that the industries to which you refer have changed from whatever it is you describe as ‘traditional’ to what you say is ‘hire and fire’ (frankly the distinction escapes me), nothing you advance in your theory above has any relevance when it comes to the pilot seniority system as employed by the vast majority of major airlines.
We will forgive you for this, since your profile makes it clear that you have no relevant aviation experience other than as a passenger. However, given the said lack of experience, I question whether you are equipped to comment upon what pilots are, or are not, ‘by nature and training’.
There are many ways in which pilots ‘meet’ as you so quaintly put it. Perhaps the most effective way is through their professional associations or through their ‘on the job’ communications. Without wishing to offer any offence whatsoever to your ‘wonderful and fabulous Chief Pilot PPRuNe’ (what a sycophantic and presumptuous phrase that is!), only a very tiny minority of our professional pilots have ever posted on PPRuNe. The great majority would never dream of engaging in discourse through this medium.
Perhaps you would do well to read again the words in red at the foot of these pages and to ponder upon the fact that, while many here profess to be highly experienced airline jet jockeys, the vast majority of PPRuNe contributors are still very wet indeed behind the ears. This is blatantly obvious when you read some of the drivel that is posted by the likes of The Guvnor, Pete Otube and 411A.
Let this not detract from those whose presence here is highly professional and who care very much about PPRuNe.
And let this not distract you, PAXboy, from your continued enjoyment in ‘reading with interest’ anything you may see written here.
[ 22 November 2001: Message edited by: tilii ]
While I accept your argument that the industries to which you refer have changed from whatever it is you describe as ‘traditional’ to what you say is ‘hire and fire’ (frankly the distinction escapes me), nothing you advance in your theory above has any relevance when it comes to the pilot seniority system as employed by the vast majority of major airlines.
We will forgive you for this, since your profile makes it clear that you have no relevant aviation experience other than as a passenger. However, given the said lack of experience, I question whether you are equipped to comment upon what pilots are, or are not, ‘by nature and training’.
There are many ways in which pilots ‘meet’ as you so quaintly put it. Perhaps the most effective way is through their professional associations or through their ‘on the job’ communications. Without wishing to offer any offence whatsoever to your ‘wonderful and fabulous Chief Pilot PPRuNe’ (what a sycophantic and presumptuous phrase that is!), only a very tiny minority of our professional pilots have ever posted on PPRuNe. The great majority would never dream of engaging in discourse through this medium.
Perhaps you would do well to read again the words in red at the foot of these pages and to ponder upon the fact that, while many here profess to be highly experienced airline jet jockeys, the vast majority of PPRuNe contributors are still very wet indeed behind the ears. This is blatantly obvious when you read some of the drivel that is posted by the likes of The Guvnor, Pete Otube and 411A.
Let this not detract from those whose presence here is highly professional and who care very much about PPRuNe.
And let this not distract you, PAXboy, from your continued enjoyment in ‘reading with interest’ anything you may see written here.
[ 22 November 2001: Message edited by: tilii ]
Guvnor & Paxboy:
Iīve had this discussion with my father(ex "multinational" manager who used to fly more as SLF than I do now) rather often.
PLEASE let us know:
HOW do/would you "measure" a pilotīs "ability & aptitude"?
WHO would/should assess a pilotīs "ability & aptitude"?
Please think long and hard, about the "how" and "why" and what consequences they ultimately have.
(Hint: A SAFE operation is the task with the highest priority for all pilots.)
Thank you.
Iīve had this discussion with my father(ex "multinational" manager who used to fly more as SLF than I do now) rather often.
PLEASE let us know:
HOW do/would you "measure" a pilotīs "ability & aptitude"?
WHO would/should assess a pilotīs "ability & aptitude"?
Please think long and hard, about the "how" and "why" and what consequences they ultimately have.
(Hint: A SAFE operation is the task with the highest priority for all pilots.)
Thank you.
Guest
Posts: n/a
From the top
tilii - you're either being dense (which I have on very good authority you're not) or you're being deliberately disingenuous when you ignore what I specifically said several times - I'm talking about the named companies as a whole rather than their flight departments!
Let me reiterate - no other industry uses a seniority system such as that used by airlines.
I find it amusing that you're so anti one form of 'serfitude' - bonding - whilst completely supportive of another.
As I said previously, jobs for life have gone. If you want loyalty, get yourself a dog. What you have are two groups that each have something the other wants: the employers have money; and the employees have skills. The employees trade those skills for the employer's cash. That's life in a nutshell - unless of course you happen to know differently?
Where you have crews responsible for their own ratings - which obviates the need for bonding - they will be able to select what type they want to be qualified on and with no seniority system they can move from airline to airline as they wish, moving straight into a position for which they are suited and qualified.
This is what happens in most other industries - if someone who has been, say a teacher, wishes to become a computer programmer then they will go off and get themselves suitably qualified and find themselves a job. If an employer is prepared to retrain an employee - whether it's a teacher as a computer programmer or a DHC8 pilot as a 737 one then it should be a privilege and not a right.
By operating on a 'muggins turn'/'dead man's shoes' seniority system, not only are you denying your most skilled and able people the opportunity for rapid advancement; but you are not properly utilising your resources - which goes a long way towards explaining the current state of the industry.
Abolishing the seniority system would also get rid of such insanities as scope clauses.
In return for their investment in themselves, crew members would be able to seek - and obtain - higher pay rates which both reflect supply and demand and the fact that the employer would not have to invest further money training them.
The laws of supply and demand would of course apply to ratings. If everyone goes off and gets themselves an A380 rating, then the oversupply of crews would drive down salary levels which would make it less attractive for people to do the ratings. Come on, this is basic economics - you know this already! :rolleyes!
Pay rates would actually end up about the same for all aircraft types - which again is as it should be - and therefore the real decision factors will be the base, type of operations and the lifestyle.
Incidentally, I note that whilst you accused me of "stooping to rudeness" all of your posts on this subject have been remarkably vituperative towards anyone that disagrees with you. Whilst calling a spade a bloody shovel might be a trademark of your fellow countrymen, could it be that your change of domicile from the Antipodes is as a result of your forgetting who signs your pay check and reviews?
raas767 you are supremely arrogant when you say: "We are selected for a very specific skill which make us all virtually identical. We are all qualified to be captains one day."
That's completely untrue and I trust that you are a very junior FO and simply haven't had much experience in the industry! Pilots are human, with human failings. We are not all leaders, imbued with leadership skills and abilities - and that, rather than time served, is what's needed to be a commander of an aircraft. I know a lot of pilots who are perfectly well aware of their own limitations and who are happy to remain in the right hand seat. Equally, I know a number of captains who frankly should never have made it into the left hand seat. There are many airlines that demand that FOs become Captains - and if they fail the checks to do so, will be fired. Where's the loyalty there?
Wonderbusdriver - how do they assess people's ability and merit for promotion in any other large business? As your Dad - as an ex multinational manager he'll know.
Hint: if your pilots are not SAFE they should not have been employed in the first place.
tilii - you're either being dense (which I have on very good authority you're not) or you're being deliberately disingenuous when you ignore what I specifically said several times - I'm talking about the named companies as a whole rather than their flight departments!
Let me reiterate - no other industry uses a seniority system such as that used by airlines.
I find it amusing that you're so anti one form of 'serfitude' - bonding - whilst completely supportive of another.
As I said previously, jobs for life have gone. If you want loyalty, get yourself a dog. What you have are two groups that each have something the other wants: the employers have money; and the employees have skills. The employees trade those skills for the employer's cash. That's life in a nutshell - unless of course you happen to know differently?
Where you have crews responsible for their own ratings - which obviates the need for bonding - they will be able to select what type they want to be qualified on and with no seniority system they can move from airline to airline as they wish, moving straight into a position for which they are suited and qualified.
This is what happens in most other industries - if someone who has been, say a teacher, wishes to become a computer programmer then they will go off and get themselves suitably qualified and find themselves a job. If an employer is prepared to retrain an employee - whether it's a teacher as a computer programmer or a DHC8 pilot as a 737 one then it should be a privilege and not a right.
By operating on a 'muggins turn'/'dead man's shoes' seniority system, not only are you denying your most skilled and able people the opportunity for rapid advancement; but you are not properly utilising your resources - which goes a long way towards explaining the current state of the industry.
Abolishing the seniority system would also get rid of such insanities as scope clauses.
In return for their investment in themselves, crew members would be able to seek - and obtain - higher pay rates which both reflect supply and demand and the fact that the employer would not have to invest further money training them.
The laws of supply and demand would of course apply to ratings. If everyone goes off and gets themselves an A380 rating, then the oversupply of crews would drive down salary levels which would make it less attractive for people to do the ratings. Come on, this is basic economics - you know this already! :rolleyes!
Pay rates would actually end up about the same for all aircraft types - which again is as it should be - and therefore the real decision factors will be the base, type of operations and the lifestyle.
Incidentally, I note that whilst you accused me of "stooping to rudeness" all of your posts on this subject have been remarkably vituperative towards anyone that disagrees with you. Whilst calling a spade a bloody shovel might be a trademark of your fellow countrymen, could it be that your change of domicile from the Antipodes is as a result of your forgetting who signs your pay check and reviews?
raas767 you are supremely arrogant when you say: "We are selected for a very specific skill which make us all virtually identical. We are all qualified to be captains one day."
That's completely untrue and I trust that you are a very junior FO and simply haven't had much experience in the industry! Pilots are human, with human failings. We are not all leaders, imbued with leadership skills and abilities - and that, rather than time served, is what's needed to be a commander of an aircraft. I know a lot of pilots who are perfectly well aware of their own limitations and who are happy to remain in the right hand seat. Equally, I know a number of captains who frankly should never have made it into the left hand seat. There are many airlines that demand that FOs become Captains - and if they fail the checks to do so, will be fired. Where's the loyalty there?
Wonderbusdriver - how do they assess people's ability and merit for promotion in any other large business? As your Dad - as an ex multinational manager he'll know.
Hint: if your pilots are not SAFE they should not have been employed in the first place.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Guvnor
My dear chap, thank you so much for your very kind words. I am pleased you take heed of your 'very good authority', though the fact that you rely upon it here is simply evidence of how wide of the mark idle gossip can be (born and bred in Blighty, I'm afraid).
I like the way you have responded here on the issue of the seniority system. It's good, plausible stuff, Guv, as found in the vast majority of your posts. But it is wrong, as only time will tell. FWIW, I think that in the short term your prophesies may come true. But I do think that in the fullness of time even you will sing a different tune. Let us wait and see.
Meanwhile, I must say that you had earned my grudging respect over recent times. I had begun to believe I had yours. Sadly, your contributions to this thread are a huge step back in time. I do wish you would tone down your rampant capitalism and ease up on trying to be the eternal know it all. 
And let me reiterate - no other industry but the 'aviation industry' operates airliners. Therefore, the fact that no other industry uses a seniority system such as that used by those airlines is utterly unsurprising and largely bloody irrelevant. How's that for calling a spade a shovel?
[ 22 November 2001: Message edited by: tilii ]
My dear chap, thank you so much for your very kind words. I am pleased you take heed of your 'very good authority', though the fact that you rely upon it here is simply evidence of how wide of the mark idle gossip can be (born and bred in Blighty, I'm afraid).
I like the way you have responded here on the issue of the seniority system. It's good, plausible stuff, Guv, as found in the vast majority of your posts. But it is wrong, as only time will tell. FWIW, I think that in the short term your prophesies may come true. But I do think that in the fullness of time even you will sing a different tune. Let us wait and see.
Meanwhile, I must say that you had earned my grudging respect over recent times. I had begun to believe I had yours. Sadly, your contributions to this thread are a huge step back in time. I do wish you would tone down your rampant capitalism and ease up on trying to be the eternal know it all.
And let me reiterate - no other industry but the 'aviation industry' operates airliners. Therefore, the fact that no other industry uses a seniority system such as that used by those airlines is utterly unsurprising and largely bloody irrelevant. How's that for calling a spade a shovel?
[ 22 November 2001: Message edited by: tilii ]
Guest
Posts: n/a
tilii, note please that this is simply my prophecy of the way that things will go - and one which I am interested to see you fully concur with.
There are many things in life that we do not agree with; and wish we can change - but lack the power or ability to do so.
For what it's worth - and I've said this many times before as well - I'm of the Herb Kelleher school of management; where trust mutual respect and job enjoyment reigns paramount.
Working practices will change - and telecommuting will be a way of life that for many will be a positive advancement; and for other, less technologically minded people, a serious problem.
I do, however, believe that the seniority system is an anachronism and one which causes as much disservice to the employee as it does the employer.
There are many things in life that we do not agree with; and wish we can change - but lack the power or ability to do so.
For what it's worth - and I've said this many times before as well - I'm of the Herb Kelleher school of management; where trust mutual respect and job enjoyment reigns paramount.
Working practices will change - and telecommuting will be a way of life that for many will be a positive advancement; and for other, less technologically minded people, a serious problem.
I do, however, believe that the seniority system is an anachronism and one which causes as much disservice to the employee as it does the employer.